ArticleBMC medicine2026
Targeted long-read genomic and epigenomic profiling enhances timely comprehensive variant discovery in hypotonia and muscle weakness.
Article in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdentifying the genetic basis of hypotonia and muscle weakness is critical for patient management and family counseling. However, diagnosis is often hindered by diverse genomic alterations, including repeat expansions, structural variants (SVs), and methylation defects. Standard-of-care testing, largely based on short-read sequencing, is limited in its ability to detect this heterogeneous variation landscape, leaving many patients undiagnosed or requiring lengthy sequential testing. Long-read sequencing represents a promising solution. However, its application as a first-tier diagnostic assay for hypotonia remains unexplored.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 227 patients with hypotonia to assess diagnostic yield, time-to-diagnosis, and costs associated with standard-of-care testing. A long-read whole-genome sequencing (LR-WGS) workflow with targeted analysis of hypotonia-associated genes was developed to detect and prioritize pathogenic SNVs, SVs, and CNVs, repeat expansions, and methylation changes at key disease loci. The workflow was validated in a reference-positive cohort with known diagnoses (n = 15) and applied to an unsolved cohort (n = 14). Variant interpretation followed ACMG guidelines and was confirmed with orthogonal methods.
resultsStandard-of-care testing achieved a diagnostic yield of 42% with an average time-to-diagnosis of 68.7 days; however, 30% of diagnosed patients experienced significant delays (average 169 days) due to sequential testing. The LR-WGS based approach identified all known pathogenic variants in the positive cohort, including SMN1 deletions, methylation defects at 15q11.2/Prader-Willi locus, FMR1 repeat expansions, and sequence and copy-number variants in > 100 genes underlying myopathies and muscular dystrophies. The targeted long-read pipeline reduced prioritized variant calls by 97.9-99.9% and, in the unsolved cohort, yielded one definitive diagnosis (de novo COL6A3 deletion) and one possible diagnosis (aberrant methylation and copy number at POMK), for an additional 14% yield. Among patients diagnosed after sequential testing (n = 29), LR-WGS is expected to reduce time-to-diagnosis by ~ 85% and decrease cumulative diagnostic delays, with projected healthcare cost savings of $396,000-439,000. Across the entire 227 patient cohort, LR-WGS is anticipated to reduce testing costs by 6.5%, yielding an average savings of $105 per patient.
conclusionsLR-WGS enables comprehensive discovery of genomic and epigenomic variants in hypotonia and muscle weakness, improving diagnostic yield, shortening diagnostic timelines, and reducing costs compared with current standard-of-care testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.